devils advocate; maybe because, in conversations regarding slavery, complicity is held by everyone, though in conversations held by either side of the conversation people want to deflect the blame? you could very easily turn the dialogue in this meme around, depending on your perspective, and it would be just as valid.
people are shit. in nearly every culture, work was avoided as much as possible by whatever means possible, and for millennia this meant owning people to make your chores easier. if you could afford to own people, you did. this doesn’t excuse anyone, because again, historically, ALL people are shit, regardless of race, gender, religion, or any other demographic.
Lol. I’m going to agree with the devils advocate that as a general truth all people are shit in some way to some degree. I can’t really get behind the whole “everyone is complicit” thing though- I mean… the slaves generally were not complicit we can’t really place blame on them. In context to the discussion- we can’t conflate Africans with Americans of African ancestry, nor slaves with slave traders just because they are of the same peoples. That’s a bit like making a Robert victim sue themselves to get back the money that was lost because the robber was their brother. In the modern day discussion- Africans and multi generational Americans of African ancestry are generally spectated by a large gap in culture, language, and histories. Even the first settlers to the colonies from Europe and abroad’s descendants who largely didn’t have their languages and culture stripped away are generally divergent from those relatives who stayed in their place of ancestry for these centuries.
Few people could or would be mistaken for a native of Spain and fit right in if they moved there who grew up as the nth generation in a chain of ancestors born in the United States since the colonies or 1800’s. But it ultimately doesn’t matter who is also implicated. That’s a kindergarten level lesson. If you and Johnny work together to steal a toy from the play area, Johnny’s complicity has nothing to do with your punishment beyond perhaps to paint a picture of willful conspiracy- unless Johnny forced you or tricked you- which isn’t the case with those importing slaves in the Atlantic slave trade. Likewise, if Suzy and Jimmy punched a kid and took his snack- wether that is “worse” than what you did or not- your responsibilities and restitution are separate from that situation. The term is “whataboutism” in popular vernacular. When wrong is done and we attempt to deflect or ignore our culpability by pointing out the wrongs of others or finding a way to make the victim of wrong culpable
good point about the slaves themselves not being complicit; it was implied, but i did not make that clear. and by no means am i attempting to spread the blame so as to dampen the severity of the atrocity; every willing participant is just as guilty and should be just as judged to the same standard, and harshly, because we are discussing the buying and selling of human beings.
For sure. And to put two things out there:
1. I didn’t down vote you.
2. I didn’t think you specifically were saying that the slaves themselves were complicit- I did just want to address the issue for anyone who might come along so that it was not ambiguous.
It can be annoying I admit- the mark of the times. One used to be able to say certain things in jest Biff example, because they were SO outrageous or idiotic that it should be clear to anyone that it was obviously hyperbole. With the internet- it was no longer so much the case that we were insulated from the sorts of people who would say such things seriously, and in more modern times we’ve come to an age where our elected officials and such routinely say and do things which once would have existed in a late night comedy lampoon. It can make it difficult because by similar token, omitting specifics where we assume any reasonable or decent person would infer them, others may assume we did so with intent…
.. because there are enough people who would do so out of intent to be plausible. And of course, inclusion and recognition are overall social positives and overall improve the lives of individuals who may have been excluded or went unrecognized or considered- but with all the religions and nationalities and ethnicities and levels of abilities and conditions or sensitivities etc. it really isn’t practical for every person to be personally experienced and intuitively comfort each one at every moment or even to be aware of the existence and proclivities of each in general let alone on the level of each individual person and their particulars. When one isn’t aware of or adept at consideration of a specific identity it is often perceived on the same level as opposition or hostility. So it’s not easy navigating these digital streets by any means.
You can’t really compare horrible things like that. The USA placed Japanese Americans into prison camps with horrible conditions and took their property, lands, and wealth. That’s horrible. Native peoples moved into these camps with their horrible conditions because these temporary prisons had better conditions in some cases than permanent housing set up for natives. Ok. So that means taking away someone business and home and locking a suburban family in a prison is ok because at least it was “better” treatment than native tribes got? No. Duh. No shit. Both are not ok.
The Holocaust was a well organized precision and horrific attempt at genocide of an entire people. But… read up on what the Japanese did in China and compare the body counts.
Is what happened in China worse because more people died? Chinese and Jewish people were used for horrific experiments and labor or tasks… is it worse to be a test subject for poison gas or to have your blood replaced with horse blood?
Is it worse to have a lower total death toll but reduce an ethnic group to near obliteration or to have a giant body count on an ethnic group that is larger…? Why even bother with the comparison? It’s horrible. We can do this with other things- is it worse to lose the love of your life or never find the love of your life? Worse to be wealthy and lose it all or to live a whole life in poverty? Depends on your perspective I guess.
We don’t actually need to decide what’s “worse,” so much as we just need to acknowledge when something horrible has happened and when we carry responsibility- we had a part in that wrong or unjustly were enriched by it, we have an ethical obligation to attempt to repair or restore things. If we had no tangible responsibility, we still may have a humanitarian obligation to assist as able in some manner or version of attempting to “make whole” or at least mitigate suffering and harm. It’s not hard. This is grade school stuff.
people are shit. in nearly every culture, work was avoided as much as possible by whatever means possible, and for millennia this meant owning people to make your chores easier. if you could afford to own people, you did. this doesn’t excuse anyone, because again, historically, ALL people are shit, regardless of race, gender, religion, or any other demographic.
1. I didn’t down vote you.
2. I didn’t think you specifically were saying that the slaves themselves were complicit- I did just want to address the issue for anyone who might come along so that it was not ambiguous.
It can be annoying I admit- the mark of the times. One used to be able to say certain things in jest Biff example, because they were SO outrageous or idiotic that it should be clear to anyone that it was obviously hyperbole. With the internet- it was no longer so much the case that we were insulated from the sorts of people who would say such things seriously, and in more modern times we’ve come to an age where our elected officials and such routinely say and do things which once would have existed in a late night comedy lampoon. It can make it difficult because by similar token, omitting specifics where we assume any reasonable or decent person would infer them, others may assume we did so with intent…
The Holocaust was a well organized precision and horrific attempt at genocide of an entire people. But… read up on what the Japanese did in China and compare the body counts.
Is what happened in China worse because more people died? Chinese and Jewish people were used for horrific experiments and labor or tasks… is it worse to be a test subject for poison gas or to have your blood replaced with horse blood?
We don’t actually need to decide what’s “worse,” so much as we just need to acknowledge when something horrible has happened and when we carry responsibility- we had a part in that wrong or unjustly were enriched by it, we have an ethical obligation to attempt to repair or restore things. If we had no tangible responsibility, we still may have a humanitarian obligation to assist as able in some manner or version of attempting to “make whole” or at least mitigate suffering and harm. It’s not hard. This is grade school stuff.